Why Qorvo?

What’s Best? Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) or 5G?

Design Hub Menu

November 15, 2018

Every
time a new cellular phone standard comes out, we see new claims about the
“end of Wi-Fi.” When 3G was announced, the promise was that it
would make Wi‑Fi (802.11b) redundant, which clearly turned out to be
incorrect. With 4G (LTE), this story repeated itself and claimed it would put
Wi‑Fi (802.11ac) in the shredder. And now the 5G message is that it will cover
both the inside and outside of homes and buildings. It’s almost as
though Wi‑Fi will soon no longer be needed.

This begs the question: What will be the impact of the next generation of
Wi‑Fi, Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax)? Do we even need it in the
5G/wireless landscape? I think we need better questions.

Beyond the hype

Of course, some of the messaging around 5G is just typical marketing hype,
showcasing the favorable points and ignoring the less favorable ones.
For example, 5G with 4 Gbps will be faster than Wi‑Fi (.11ac) with
1.3 Gbps. The immediate counter argument is that Wi‑Fi (.11ax) with
9.6 Gbps will be faster than 5G. But will these speeds be achieved in
real life? We’ve seen this before, these glossy promises of high-speed
access being wiped away by the hard truth of “no connection in the
basement,” or something similar. Cue the collective consumer yawn.

(And by the way, how good will 9.6 Gbps Wi‑Fi be in the basement, if
the connection to the home is 300 Mbps, or even less? What problem is
this solving?)

If we want a real sense of where the developments are heading, it’s
probably a good idea to go a little deeper than marketing headlines. What are
the real facts that can guide us? For starters, laws of physics tell us that
radio waves (both Wi‑Fi and 5G) have difficulties penetrating objects such as
walls and foliage, and their data rates decrease with distance. Radiating more
power helps a little, but it also causes unwanted noise, making equipment more
expensive. In addition, there are legal maximum output power ratings to
adhere to.

There are also economic laws. Cellular (3G/4G/5G) uses licensed bands.
Mobile operators (service providers) pay money to use this spectrum and need
to roll out a network of (connected) base stations to cover a large area. They
then need to recover this money with subscription fees. In such a service
area, many users need to be served, sharing the same frequency band over
multiple channels.

In contrast, Wi‑Fi uses unlicensed
spectrum, which is available to all for free. However, the output power is
very low, so the radio signal (more or less) stays in your own house or
building and has a favorable (so-called) spectral reuse. The same frequency
band can be used in every house. However, to get the internet at your front
door, you need to pay an internet service provider a subscription fee,
including a simple router that is part of that fee. If you want, you can buy a
more expensive router as well.

So, in this frequency band perspective, there’s an interesting
technology split between Wi‑Fi and 5G, but do customers really care? Customers
care about fast internet access — anywhere — at a decent
price. In contrast, operators/providers care about providing good internet
service everywhere (at home and around the home) and keeping costs under
control. Interestingly enough, with so-called Wi-Fi
off-load (where a cellular network off-loads traffic to Wi-Fi
connections), the border between the two different technologies is already
blurring.

A bit of history can be helpful

It’s interesting to note that the Wi‑Fi world is rooted in the
commercial computer industry, while 5G is rooted in the more legislated
telephone industry. So, telephone operators (now service providers) have more
affinity with 5G than with Wi‑Fi. When most telephone operators started to
deliver internet to consumers, it was delivery to the front door. What
happened inside the house was the consumer’s responsibility.

There’s another distinction between cellular and Wi‑Fi:
a mobile phone uses a service subscription that requires a SIM card. This SIM
card ensures that phones are connected to subscriptions and don’t use
the network illegally. But Wi‑Fi doesn’t need a SIM card; the frequency
band is license-free. Not surprisingly, the mobile world is looking for ways
to make the SIM card redundant, but initiatives like soft SIM and eSIM
aren’t making the desired progress because they’re too cumbersome
and/or are not sufficiently secure.

The consequence of these histories is that the consumer’s internet
connectivity world is split into two parts: mobile (with a subscription and
SIM) and stationary (with a router at home). This scenario is now
well-established. Of course, wireless internet connectivity can be
troublesome, and initially telephone operators used this hassle as an
opportunity to promote cellular as an alternative for Wi‑Fi. The good news is
this mentality is changing.

Cable operators have also entered the picture. They’ve found that,
for many consumers, Wi‑Fi coverage in the home was a major concern. Cable
operators responded by extending their service to include good coverage inside
the home. This is forcing cellular operators to do the same, as well
as to develop a better quality of wireless indoor internet service.

There are also interesting crossover products, though, and a nice example
is the FRITZ!Box
6890 from German supplier AVM. This box is a traditional
router, providing Wi‑Fi everywhere in the home. But it doesn’t use
DSL, fiber or cable — it uses LTE. So, this box has a
SIM card and operates the same way as if you use your mobile phone as a
hotspot to connect your tablet to the internet, for example. The difference
is the FRITZ!Box makes this configuration permanent in your house. The trick
is to make sure you have the right subscription service (preferably
unlimited data) to avoid high mobile charges for your private wireless
hotspot.

A better way of looking at
things

Despite these crossovers, when talking about cellular and Wi‑Fi, it still
feels like two separate worlds and that we’re switching back and forth
between them, like a car shifting gears. Fortunately, most phones are
somewhat smart, and when the Wi‑Fi connection isn’t working, the phone
automatically switches to the cellular network. But there’s a real
problem if you’re “on the edge of Wi‑Fi” and Wi‑Fi
attempts to take back the connection, leaving you in limbo with a nonworking
Wi‑Fi and a nonworking cellular connection. In those moments, the solution
is to turn off Wi‑Fi to end the battle and avoid poor response times.

But wouldn’t it be better if there were a good hand-off between the
Wi‑Fi connection and the cellular connection, so that the user always gets
the best performance against the lowest cost?

As a consumer, I wouldn’t care whether I am connected via Wi‑Fi or,
in the future, 5G. The system just provides the best connectivity, whether at
home and indoors, or outside, or on the road. I would then have one
subscription for my internet at home and for my cellular service outdoors
— but with a twist. I’m talking about a different way of thinking.
In this scenario, a service provider (whether it’s a mobile operator or
a cable operator) provides the highest quality wireless internet access
service, both at home and on the road. There are many initiatives underway in
this area, all in the category of “Wi-Fi off-load,” and in
principle the technology is there. But it isn’t mainstream yet, due to
multiple competing and legacy interests.

The “right” choice

It may be clearer that the customer genuinely isn’t interested in
next-generation Wi‑Fi or in the “next G.” The consumer
simply wants the best internet connection — anywhere, at any time
and at the most affordable price. This is the way everyone —
whether cellular providers, hotspot providers or internet service providers
— can think about how to deliver the best service most efficiently to
their vast subscription base.

Key is to envision 5G and Wi‑Fi 6 working together to implement
this, instead of playing one against the other. There should be no
“right” technology choice or choosing the one best technology
for a given application.

And hopefully this different way of thinking will also help to
concentrate on today’s real bottleneck — how to get
high-speed internet to the home.

Go in Depth: 5G or .11ax
(Wi-Fi 6)?

Have another topic that you would like Qorvo experts to cover? Email your
suggestions to the Qorvo Blog team and it
could be featured in an upcoming post.

About the Author

Cees LinksGeneral Manager, Wireless Connectivity Business Unit

Cees Links (pronounced "Case") was the founder and CEO of GreenPeak Technologies, acquired by Qorvo in 2016.
He is a pioneer of the wireless data industry, a visionary leader bringing the world of mobile computing and continuous networking together. In 2017, he was honored as a Wi-Fi pioneer with the Golden Mousetrap Lifetime Achievement Award by Design News.